On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 15:22 +0000, Undekari, Sunil Dutt wrote: > > That's not what the critical protocol stuff was designed for, so no. > I would consider the P2P connection phase (P2P+WPS+WPA) to be critical > and any off channel operations (scan) triggered by the host driver would result in > the delayed / failed P2P connection attempt. > I suppose there should be an indication to the host driver w.r.t p2p connection > attempt so that any off load operations on any other interface sharing the same radio > would be avoided by the driver. > Since there is already an existing interface through the critical protocol indication, I > thought of extending it to also include a P2P protocol/connection. This new proto id > would be an indication to the drivers to allow the scan on the current interface > and avoid any scans on another considering the fact that a p2p connection requires a > scan. > Do you propose an alternative (a new interface?) to achieve the same? Just do it in the supplicant - that has full control over what's going on with a given device. Trying to have the kernel manage multiple things that may or may not be exclusive and are all done in userspace is going to be a futile exercise. johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
